Speculation: Small Market NHL Teams Could Fold, Sabres are one of them

[Eleven]

3 minutes ago, That Aud Smell said:

@Eleven: To your original point, stick tap for having it more right than I appreciated:

“The Sabres' strong television ratings – first in the league in three of the past four years – earned them a better local broadcasting deal than half the league's 30 other teams.”

(from an article in today’s online TBN.)

 

And that's just TV viewers in the US.  When we're looking at the gate--which we are, in this thread---we have to consider all those fans who live very close to Buffalo but don't count in the ratings only because there's a river in between them and the team.

Edited April 19, 2020 by Eleven

[nfreeman]

12 minutes ago, Theana745 said:

Not my words. This was directly from Mr. Bettman. No cap adjustment next season. 

link?

[Theana745]

10 minutes ago, nfreeman said:

link?

Here's the link 

 

Edited April 19, 2020 by Theana745

[nfreeman]

15 minutes ago, Theana745 said:

Here's the link 

 

That doesn't say that it came from Bettman.

[mjd1001]

50 minutes ago, Theana745 said:

Here's the link 

 

I can see that as being a 'loose' plan or hope at this time, but when it comes to make the decision I don't think it will be the case.

Too much is uncertain and almost all of it leads to less revenue:

-When will the season start? Will games this season be permanently lost?  Will the season have a late start or games lost next year. Every one of those is a loss of revenue.

-Merch sales and concessions, that is a lot of money that is already lost. That number will continue to go down/be a loss for every fan that doesn't attend a game again next season. Plus parking, plus other items.

-Advertisers. Even IF they could start next season on time and the buildings were full, some companies are in bad shape and will cut back on advertising. Do you think every ad on the boards or the ice in every Arena around the league...that every single one of those companies will keep spending the same or more money next year?  Then add in game over-the-speakers ads, banner ads, ads in the buildings, local ads (including restaurants and small businesses) that may buy a 30 second spot during the local broadcast.  ANY reduction in that will be a reduction in revenue.

-Ticket sales.  Once again, how long before we can have people in the seats, and will it be the same?  Some fans may not want to come back at all.  What about paying for improvements to the Arena (extra cleaning, more  space in restrooms/concessions).  I have heard from more than one source that entertainment venues AT FIRST may only allow people in every other row, or every 2nd or 3rd seat must be empty. That may be how they start this.

-National broadcasts.  Not as big of a slice of the revenue pie as in the NFL, but will some major advertisers stop (or ask for reduced rates) because they have less money to work with?

-Finally, we all hear there are a lot of teams losing money, and relying on revenue sharing.  How many teams that were 'barely' making money will now move to the 'losing' money side of the ledger, and how many teams that were losing are going to get a lot worse?

I'm sure I'm missing a lot of things. Bottom line is, there is going to be lost revenue, and maybe a LOT Of lost revenue.  I can't see the actual cap being the same without the league asking for major concessions on player salaries. When revenue goes down....or even when your visibility of potential future revenue goes down, you have to cut expenses. Player salaries are the largest expense by far.

 

The only hope I think the players have medium to long term as that all this stimulus money (and maybe a lot more being created by it being funneled through the banks instead of directly to small businesses, letting banks use that trick of 'fractional reserve baking to loan out even MORE than they are getting)...that this money creates so much in the system that all the dollars have to go somewhere.  If that happens a lot of people will 'get their money' but that money might be worth a lot less. Of course, economists have been saying that is possible for decades now and it never really happened (that type of inflation) but if M3 money supply skyrockets this year by close to $6-$8 Trillion, then maybe (but that is an entirely different discussion)

 

Who knows, maybe Bettman knows of a potential 'bailiout' for entertainment purposes.  The pro sports leagues can argue its not about the owners and the players, but how many other 'jobs' are tied to their existence.  In Canada, I'm sure a lot of citizens wouldn't mind some money supporting their teams....and in the U.S. with just one bill giving over $2,000,000,000,000 so far....finding 'money for all those tied to the entertainment industry...a 'bailout' of $20,000,000 to each us team would be just 1/1000 of one percent of what was spent in that one single bill?  I hope not.

-

Edited April 19, 2020 by mjd1001

[Brawndo]

The NHLPA disputed that per LeBrun

 

[I Remember Imlach]

I don't have the patience to listen to the guy for 24 minutes or whatever, but did he acknowledge that the NHL is in the process of receiving a $650,000,000 expansion fee for Seattle?  A 1/31 share* of that is a little under $21,000,000.  Even if the league office skims something off the fee for administration, every existing NHL team (with the possible exception of Vegas?) has a nice payday coming if it can just stick around for it.  No NHL team will fold for the next few years at least.

 

* 31 would be the wrong divisor if Vegas isn't entitled to a full share.

Edited April 19, 2020 by I Remember Imlach
%#*@! Autocorrect added mistake I had to fix.

[Taro T]

5 hours ago, nfreeman said:

The bolded is simply false.  The cap is adjusted each year based on the previous year's revenues.  Since revenues for this year are going to fall, the cap will fall too.

Again, there are provisions in the CBA that allow both sides to agree to a different $ amount for the cap IF there are reasons to expect next year's revenues to vary substantially from the current season's revenues.  That provision is primarily included for revisions to national TV contracts, but the current circumstances fit the same bill.

My expectation is that the cap will go down slightly next year, but nowhere nearly as much as it would taking all of the recent events into full consideration.

How escrow is calculated & actually put into place will be interesting.  Because if the cap is artificially high, there is near certainty that player salaries will exceed their allotted 50% of HRR.  Might the owners allow the players a larger chunk of next year's pie than the agreed to 50%?  Doubtful.  But maybe the players agree up front to something for the next CBA that the owners want to be allowed that concession now?

This lockdown has given the 2 sides a tremendous opportunity to build a level of trust that hasn't existed for at least 30 years.   It more likely will drive them to levels of distrust that even Goodenow & Bettman couldn't muster for each other.  But still am hoping they do finally build the partnership they need to flourish moving forward.

[Eleven]

33 minutes ago, Taro T said:

Again, there are provisions in the CBA that allow both sides to agree to a different $ amount for the cap IF there are reasons to expect next year's revenues to vary substantially from the current season's revenues.  That provision is primarily included for revisions to national TV contracts, but the current circumstances fit the same bill.

My expectation is that the cap will go down slightly next year, but nowhere nearly as much as it would taking all of the recent events into full consideration.

How escrow is calculated & actually put into place will be interesting.  Because if the cap is artificially high, there is near certainty that player salaries will exceed their allotted 50% of HRR.  Might the owners allow the players a larger chunk of next year's pie than the agreed to 50%?  Doubtful.  But maybe the players agree up front to something for the next CBA that the owners want to be allowed that concession now?

This lockdown has given the 2 sides a tremendous opportunity to build a level of trust that hasn't existed for at least 30 years.   It more likely will drive them to levels of distrust that even Goodenow & Bettman couldn't muster for each other.  But still am hoping they do finally build the partnership they need to flourish moving forward.

Not gonna happen with Fehr around.  Or Bettman, for that matter.  I wish the NHL had plucked Adam Silver from the NBA rather than Bettman.

[Taro T]

7 minutes ago, Eleven said:

Not gonna happen with Fehr around.  Or Bettman, for that matter.  I wish the NHL had plucked Adam Silver from the NBA rather than Bettman.

Yeah.  The reality is we get Fehr and Bettman.

Such a shame that Saskin was paranoid and Chelios was militant.  Imagine where the league could be if Daly had Bettman's job and Saskin still ran the union. 

[nfreeman]

1 hour ago, Taro T said:

Again, there are provisions in the CBA that allow both sides to agree to a different $ amount for the cap IF there are reasons to expect next year's revenues to vary substantially from the current season's revenues.  That provision is primarily included for revisions to national TV contracts, but the current circumstances fit the same bill.

My expectation is that the cap will go down slightly next year, but nowhere nearly as much as it would taking all of the recent events into full consideration.

How escrow is calculated & actually put into place will be interesting.  Because if the cap is artificially high, there is near certainty that player salaries will exceed their allotted 50% of HRR.  Might the owners allow the players a larger chunk of next year's pie than the agreed to 50%?  Doubtful.  But maybe the players agree up front to something for the next CBA that the owners want to be allowed that concession now?

This lockdown has given the 2 sides a tremendous opportunity to build a level of trust that hasn't existed for at least 30 years.   It more likely will drive them to levels of distrust that even Goodenow & Bettman couldn't muster for each other.  But still am hoping they do finally build the partnership they need to flourish moving forward.

I generally agree, although I think it's pretty close to a lock that the cap is lower next year.  I was just responding to a post that had stated with certitude that the cap is not decreasing next year.

[sabremike]

On 4/19/2020 at 8:10 AM, Curt said:

A TV rating is not a measure of the raw volume of people watching.  It’s a measure of the percentage of people watching.  A Sabres game has higher ratings in Buffalo than a Rangers game in NYC, but there are still more people watching in NYC.

I am not so sure of that last bit: for the series in 2007 vs the rags the MSG WNY feed not only had a much higher rating than MSG  but more people watching as well.

 

Edited April 20, 2020 by sabremike

[Marvin]

38 minutes ago, sabremike said:

I am not so sure of that last bit: for the series in 2007 vs the rags the MSG WNY feed not only had a much higher rating than MSG  but more people watching as well.

@Curt is correct about how ratings work.

However, you are correct that there are more general hockey viewers in WNY than virtually every other US hockey market.  Moreover, expatriate Buffalonians also drive ratings up nationally when the Sabres are on.

[DarthEbriate]

On 4/18/2020 at 12:19 PM, Taro T said:

Not sure of what you're saying here / might be missing your meaning.  There's a bunch of NHL players that have been Lego-ized.  Sabres included.

I think you're thinking the OYO brand figures which certainly look Legoish. And there are customizations for any Lego you want. But Lego proper had a licensing contract with the NHL back in the day and came up with this garbage in '03-'04. https://brickset.com/sets/10127-1/NHL-All-Teams-Set

Big surprise, the NHL went into a lockout and Lego was saved by Star Wars sales. Though they did also have a second set that was an Eastern conference/Western conference All Star Game look with the NHL shield. It also didn't sell well.

Edited April 20, 2020 by DarthEbriate

[nfreeman]

2 hours ago, sabremike said:

I am not so sure of that last bit: for the series in 2007 vs the rags the MSG WNY feed not only had a much higher rating than MSG  but more people watching as well.

 

I don't think this is correct.  Link?